I was on my way back from the sea shore and thinking that Shmuel holds according to R Elazar witnesses that see the handing over of the document cause the category to be established refers to both divorce, marriage and documents of sale. זה לא כמו רב דאמר הלכה כר' אלעזר בגיטין אבל בשטרות לא]According to Rabbainu Tam, even if there would be witnesses on the document, would not help. (According to the Rif and Rambam however, witnesses on the document would help) Its validity is only through the witnesses that see the giving over of the document. But in no other case of sale or presents do we need witnesses! Why here? It must be that here the witnesses that see the giving over of the piece of paper that says, “I am selling this field to you” cause the document itself to be a valid document. (Rav Shach also writes like this in laws of divorce chapter 1 law 13.) Yet in the Mishna where R. Elazar states his view (in gitin 86), he says witnesses are only needed because of liars; i.e., to verify what happened, not to establish a sale or divorce. So that Mishna has to refer only to witnesses that sign a document. But the witnesses that see a transaction are for more that just to establish the facts after the deed. ---------------------------------I was on my way back from the sea shore and thinking that שמואל holds according toר' אלעזר witnesses that see the handing over of the document cause the category to be established refers to both divorce, marriage and documents of sale. According to רבינו תם, even if there would be witnesses on the document, would not help. Its validity is only through the witnesses that see the giving over of the document. But in no other case of sale or presents do we need witnesses! Why here? It must be that here the witnesses that see the giving over of the piece of paper that says, “I am selling this field to you” cause the document itself to be a valid document. (רב שך also writes like this in laws of divorce chapter 1 law 13.) Yet in the משנה where ר' אלעזר states his view (in גיטין 86), he says witnesses are only needed because of liars; i.e., to verify what happened, not to establish a sale or divorce. So that משנה has to refer only to witnesses that sign a document. But the witnesses that see a transaction are for more that just to establish the facts after the deed.